_aded

you cant if you're selling "freedom".
imagine that all the supposed social/political systems are swords, all of them are double edged and without handles in the center making them inherently unwieldy.
the best i could see anyone hoping for is a double edged sword where the edges aren't too sharp, or something similar, but as the analogy states both ends of the blade will be dulled.
is there a system with some palatable bad stuff and plenty of good to counterbalance that? probably, we might be living in it right now lol

A menacing post slithers

encouraging certain values in the society. If e.g. murder is within the scope of an individual's capacities, it's a matter of probability whether that person ends up murdering someone regardless of which laws are in place. But if you change the way that person was brought up and what values and goals was instilled in that person at the outset, he/she might become near-incapable of murder.

(ISFP)

- Any policy can only be implemented because of the structure of the political power system by which the components of the system interact to result in whatever outcomes are produced. A new political power structure emerges.

The answer is, you CAN'T control people, you can only punish bad behavior and reaffirm good behavior, but people are EXTREMELY stubborn and it's why we are still alive.

As for the search for truth,
I know from my own painful searching,
with its many blind alleys,
how hard it is to take a reliable step,
be it ever so small,
towards the understanding of that which is truly significant.

~Albert Einstein

The purpose of life is to eliminate suffering and to give unconditional positive feedback.
You can never completely eliminate suffering but giving unconditional positive feedback without a condition is only meant for true truth seekers.
Therefore, the purpose of life is to spread your message.

I have been enlightened by coming to grips with my shadow self and now I see.
That is not where the story ends. I have seen the light in my pursuit.
I speak the truth - to the heart of the matter.

"The difficulty of an impossible task is amplified infinitely by the ease to which it is not done, therefore, a task that is accomplished is difficult and a task that is never done is easy" Author unknown.

straightedgy

Just as anyone would never try to move forward by turning in a circle. Murder could itself be framed as a paradox that can't achieve anything in particular.

One could think of moving forward by rotating in place, but ultimately there is no feasible action that can achieve forward movement on a sphere from even rotation of the human body on its surface. And those unfeasible that do give some effect are beyond our mental or physical capacity.

Similarly our understanding of the world could one day abstract to a level where conflict or murder isn't simply reprehensible but makes no actionable sense as a whole, gives no result.

The two most obvious ways would be to make all other people permanent in the full effect of their existence, or to make them invisible by restricting some or all of the ways of how they affect others. Other people could be this feature of mental landscape (mindscape) in the distance that can be seen, but can never be reached or altered.

It's probably much easier to moderate all interaction through a virtual medium, so that it loses all physical consequences. The desired consequences could be reached by a concession from both parties and effected separately in their own shielded instances of reality. Any two people conceding to enter a single physical reality from their virtual medium would most likely come with a bunch of protocols and restrictions, that could only be removed with consent, force would be a non-factor, sophisticated algorithms would spot coercion, etc.

Though since all physical interactions could be transferred over distance or simulated using a safe virtual copy of other people's whole being, there would be no need for contact. Removing someone from one's friend list would be more effective than killing, they could be completely erased from the carefully controlled information feed.

pat pat

Like, some people are born with less capacity to empathy and with higher probability of developing satisfaction from seeing suffering in others. So would some born with certain deviancy be destined to act out on that, or would they be malleable to the degree where their upbringing could give them something else to enjoy and strive for which wasn't that harmful to others?

Like, say the traditional psychopath without compassion; In some societies would they be able to live a violent free life where they had some job of power where they'd be satisfied with feeling powerful in ways that didn't endanger their job or reputation? Would they "rationally" surmise they'd get more benefits from living according to some of the rules of society and find ways to satisfy their impulses that didn't involve violence or psychologically destroying someone?

Would this ability to adapt to acceptable means of satisfaction apply to every type of deviancy? How much of the worst type of behavior is nurture vs nature?

Though, I guess there's still people with certain illnesses where they wont be able to live according to acceptable behavior. Like people with dementia who pinch and poke at their nurses. I'm not knowledgeable about the most severe mental illness types, so can't comment on to what degree they will always be a threat or whether they are manageable in an ideal society and upbringing.

I think as of today there are individuals who come to a certain point where they will always be a threat due to the way they've developed and experienced life. Whether that is always preventable in the ideal upbringing, I wouldn't know. I'm prone to think not, but that's just a guess.